Johnson, Camille

Abstract Introduction: In the ASPIRE and ENDEAVOR trials, multiple myeloma (MM) patients treated with carfilzomib (K) had significantly improved progression‐free survival and overall survival compared with standard of care. The incidence of all-grade adverse cardiovascular events (ACVE) was 26.6% and 24.5% in the K treated groups in ASPIRE and ENDEAVOR respectively. The atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD) score is a risk stratification tool used by cardiologists to classify patients with a score ≥7.5% as high risk for the incidence of ASCVD events. To date, there are no clinically relevant models that predict the likelihood of ACVE in MM patients treated with K nor are we aware of any protective factors against ACVE. Our study aims to identify factors which can predict and mitigate the incidence of ACVE. Methods: A retrospective chart review of 372 MM patients who were treated with K between 2011 and 2018 at our institution was performed.Data were summarized using descriptive statistics; Chi-square tests of association and Kruskal-Wallis tests were employed to test for differences across groups, where appropriate. Logistic regression was performed to examine the risk factors associated with ACVE. Results: Of the 372 patients, 243 (65%) were Durie-Salmon Stage (DSS) III, 70 (19%) were International Staging System (ISS) III; 186 (50%) were men. There were a total of 102 (27%) ACVE and 33 (9%) ≥grade 3 events. The most common ACVE were congestive heart failure (29%), asymptomatic elevations in pulmonary arterial systolic pressure (PASP) (27%), and hypertension (HTN) (16%). Sixty-eight (66%) Caucasians, 14 (14%) African Americans and 17 (17%) Hispanics developed ACVE. Aspirin (ASA) (64%), beta blockers (BB) (51%), calcium channel blockers (CCB) (43%) and statins (37%) were the most common cardiac medications patients were taking at the time of K initiation. Regardless of cardiac history, patients who were taking a CCB had higher odds of experiencing an ACVE compared to patients who were not taking a CCB (CCB + Cardiac history: OR=1.9; CI=1.0-3.7; CCB, no Cardiac history: OR=6.3; CI= 2.1-18.4) (Table 1). Patients with an ASCVD score ≥7.5% did not have an increased incidence of ACVE but did have an increased incidence of ≥grade 3 vs. grade 1-2 ACVE (100% vs. 78%, p=0.092). Prior cardiac history, including history of HTN, was common (59%) but not associated with incidence or severity of ACVE. Those with type 2 diabetes had a higher rate of ≥grade 3 vs. grade 1-2 ACVE (33% vs. 10%, p=0.004). Patients on certain CV medications while receiving K-based treatment had a higher incidence of ACVE compared to those not on these medications, including BB (51% vs. 34%, p=0.002), CCB (43% vs. 26%, p=0.002), aldosterone antagonists (AA) (8% vs. 3%, p=0.024) and statins (37% vs. 25%, p=0.022). Patients on ASA were more likely to experience ≥grade 3 compared to grade 1-2 ACVE (78% vs. 53%, p=0.016). ACE inhibitors or angiotensin receptor blockers (ACE/ARB) were not associated with increased incidence or severity of ACVE. The use of K in relapsed, as opposed to induction setting, was associated with a higher incidence of ACVE (31% vs. 20%, p=0.035). Maximum dose and number of K doses were not associated with ACVE. There was no relationship between PASP elevation and age >75, use of BB, CCB, AA, ACE/ARB, number of K treatments or maximum dose of K. Factors that were associated with increased odds of ACVE in multivariate analysis included patients who received K in the relapsed setting (OR= 1.7; CI=0.94-3.0) and use of an AA (OR= 4.5; CI=1.4-14.1) (Table 1). Conclusion: In line with prior studies, 28% of MM patients treated with K at our institution developed an ACVE, with 9% grade 3 or above. Use of CCB and AA were particularly associated with increased risk of ACVE, while use of ACE/ARB were not. ASCVD score ≥7.5% was associated with an increased incidence of ≥grade 3 ACVE in K-treated patients and should perhaps be evaluated as a predictive tool in prospective studies. Disclosures Siegel: Celgene: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Janssen: Consultancy, Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; Takeda: Consultancy, Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; Novartis: Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; Amgen: Consultancy, Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; BMS: Consultancy, Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; Karyopharm: Consultancy, Honoraria; Merck: Consultancy, Honoraria, Speakers Bureau. Biran:Merck: Research Funding; Amgen: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; Takeda: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; Celgene: Consultancy, Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; BMS: Research Funding.

e14132 Background: The use of PD-1 inhibitors (PD1) has been limited due to the lack of prognostic markers of response. Previous studies have suggested that indirect inflammatory markers such as neutrophil lymphocyte ratio (NLR) and platelet lymphocyte ratio (PLR) may correlate with response to treatment and improved survival. We sought to evaluate the impact NLR and PLR in a real world cohort of patients (pts) with advanced solid tumors treated with PD1. Methods: Records of all pts treated with PD1 between 2011-2017 at the John Theurer Cancer Center were reviewed. NLR and PLR were registered at baseline and longitudinally. We dichotomized as low (lNLR/lPLR), and high (hNLR ≥5/hPLR ≥160). Univariate logistic regression and Cox proportional hazards were used for progression free survival (PFS), and overall survival (OS). Landmark analyses were performed at cycles 2 (C2), and 5 (C5). Results: 178 pts received 1131 cycles of PD1. Median age was 65 (range 24-93); 43% were female. ECOG was ≥1 for 85%. 142 pts (80%), and 89 (50%) received ≥2C and ≥5C respectively. In univariate analyses, baseline hNLR and hPLR were independently associated with inferior OS (median 7.8 vs 18.3 months; HR 1.77, 95% CI 1.21-2.43; p = 0.004), ) and (median 6.4 vs 15.6 months; HR 1.42, 95% CI 1.09-2; p = 0.04) respectively. On landmark analyses, lNLR and lPLR were associated with longer PFS and OS at 2C, and 5C. Longitudinally, lNLR and lPLR correlated with response rate; NLR decreased by 0.08 (95% CI: -0.19 to -0.04; p = 0.03) and PLR by 17 (95% CI: -29 to -14; p = 0.07) per month in responders compared with non-responders. hNLR or hPLR did not correlate with increase in autoimmune toxicities. Conclusions: hNLR, hPLR are adversely prognostic markers in pts receiving PD1 inhibitors in a “real world cohort”. These markers correlate with a longitudinal response and may help predict response. Further prospective studies are needed to determine their utility in decision making during treatment.